The husband appealed a trial judgment setting aside a pre-nuptial marriage contract and ordering an equalization payment of $5.3 million, plus spousal and child support.
The trial judge set aside the contract under s. 56(4) of the Family Law Act because the husband deliberately failed to disclose the value of his significant business assets, misrepresented his financial position, and interfered with the wife's independent legal advice.
The Court of Appeal upheld the decision, agreeing that the husband's conduct warranted setting aside the contract.
The Court also held that a post-separation, market-driven decline in the value of the husband's shares did not justify an unequal division of net family property under s. 5(6)(h) of the Act.
The appeal was dismissed.
